Ian Lynch wrote: > > On 5 June 2011 14:10, todd rme <toddrme2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If that means using some licenses that are > less than ideal from a philosophy point of view then so be it. >
That argument cut both way... except that apparently in your model, 'philosophies' or more exactly 'principles' should be dropped for the 'greater good' as long as these are not _your_ principles. and as a side note... * I find it extremely arrogant and insulting for a project that hasn't even built anything yet to self-proclaim itself as 'upstream'. * I find the argument: 'it's not our fault, Oracle made us do it by releasing they code under AL2" very unconvincing. I feel it is like saying.. well Joe offered me that present wrapped in my favorite color... it was a loaded gun without safety... what else could I do but start shooting ? You're entitled to do as you want... but this attempt to wash your hand of any responsibility for the consequences of your actions... and even better to preemptively point a finger to the group that has been working very hard to get that stick out of the proverbial mud it was in, is - how to I put that nicely - objectionable... Norbert PS: when I use 'you' above, I don't mean necessarily _you_ personally, but _you_ as in the group that promote this move. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Proposal-to-join-Apache-OpenOffice-tp3022088p3028621.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
